Docstoc

Workshop on the

Document Sample
Workshop on the Powered By Docstoc
					                      Impact of International Criminal Justice in the East African Region

                                                    22 – 24 March 2007
                                         Great Rift Valley Lodge, Naivasha, Kenya

                              Initiative Supported by Open Society Initiative for East Africa and
                                    The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation

Concept paper

Since the establishment of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) in 1994,
international criminal justice has been an issue of topical importance in the East Africa region. In
2003, the Security Council adopted the completion strategy for the ICTR within which all trials must
be completed by 2008 and all appeals by 2010. The Prosecutor of the ICTR has already transferred
thirty case files to Rwanda with the view to prosecutions before domestic courts, although he has
acknowledged the accompanying challenges which may arise with regard to the resources and
capacity of the Rwandan judicial system.1 In 2004, the International Criminal Court received referrals
from Democratic Republic of Congo and Uganda (on the “situation concerning the Lord’s
Resistance Army”2) and in 2005, the Security Council referred the situation in Darfur, Sudan, to the
ICC in Resolution 1593.

These developments have generated substantial debate within the communities affected. Yet, very
little comparative or regional discussion has taken place on the impact of international criminal
justice mechanisms on peace and justice within East Africa. As a result, the EALS and the IBA
propose to bring together lawyers from the DRC, Kenya, Rwanda, Sudan, Tanzania, and Uganda for
a workshop on ‘The Impact of International Criminal Justice in the Eastern Africa Region.”
Participants would also be invited from Sierra Leone in order to share their experience in working
with the Special Court in Sierra Leone (SCiSL) and the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. The
purpose of the workshop would be three-fold. First, to explore how the legal community from each
country has engaged with the ICTR, SCiSL and the ICC; and to share perspectives on the benefits
and challenges in working with both institutions. Second, to discuss ways in which the ICTR and
the ICC have impacted on national judicial practice and legislative reform. In this regard, particular
attention would be paid to advocacy efforts to implement the Rome Statute into domestic law.
Finally, the workshop would involve discussion on strategies for the legal communities from each
country to develop in order to maximise information-sharing and coordination in the future.

In order to allow for in-depth consideration of the issues outlined above, the EALS and the IBA
propose that the workshop involve a representative from the Directorate of Public Prosecutions,
two practising criminal lawyers (including at least one junior lawyer and where possible, lawyers with
experience working at one of the international tribunals), and a lawyer based in civil society (ideally
with experience working on victims’ rights) from each country as well as international participants
with experience working on the ICC and international ad hoc tribunals. The workshop would take
place over the course of three days and would take place in Naivasha, Kenya.



1
  Security Council, Letter Dated 5 December 2005 from the President of the International Criminal Tribunal for the
Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Genocide and Other Serious Violations on International Humanitarian Law
Committed in the Territory of Rwanda and Rwandan Citizens Responsible for Genocide and Other Such Violations
Committed in the Territory of Neighbouring States between 1 January and 31 December 1994 addressed to the
President of the Security Council, S/2005/782 (2005) at paras. 42 – 43.
2
  International Criminal Court, President of Uganda refers situation concerning Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) to
the ICC, Press Release, The Hague, (29 January 2004).


                                                              1
                   Impact of International Criminal Justice in the East African Region

                                                22 – 24 March 2007
                                     Great Rift Valley Lodge, Naivasha, Kenya

                          Initiative Supported by Open Society Initiative for East Africa and
                                The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation

DAY 1 Thursday, 22 March 2007

10.00 – 11.00 Aims and Objectives & Introduction of Participants

Chairs:
Mr. Don Deya (East African Law Society)
Ms. Lorna McGregor (International Bar Association)

Don’s Opening Remarks

This Workshop celebrates the spirit of co-operation and collaboration, in this case between the
IBA (which is the “mother” of all lawyers’ bodies in the world) and the EALS.

EALS is the umbrella body for Eastern African lawyers, representing 5 law societies and over 7,000
individual lawyers. It has programmes in the professional development and practice of law, and also
in the rule of law and human rights, from a regional perspective. It works especially closely and
around the EAC and EACJ; but also monitors the AU & NEPAD, especially the ACHPR, and the
unfolding ACtHPR.

Prior to this, EALS has not worked consistently around 2 themes i.e.
a) Conflict Resolution & Prevention (Conflict Solidarity);
b) International Criminal Law.

For EALS, we hope to:
a) Use this meeting to obtain a crash course on the status, operation and dynamics of
   international criminal law in the region and continent;
b) Contribute, in whatever way deemed appropriate, to the institutionalization of a Working Group
   of international lawyers (and lawyers interested in international law) for the purpose of
   contributing to the institutionalization of peace, security and development; and
c) Refine our ideas for a planned Responsibility to Protect Programme, which will provide for
   EALS a platform and intellectual and financial resources to delve into issues of peace, security
   and conflict resolution and cross-border solidarity in East Africa, and in the greater Horn of
   Africa and Great Lakes region.

Lorna’s Opening Remarks

One of the reasons for this workshop, reason that should also be used as an indicator, is that in the
different precedent workshops there were not enough practical outcomes. Therefore, we want to
know what works and what doesn’t, in a practical manner towards capacity building and experience
sharing.

As such, the Workshop’s key objectives are to foster:
a) A greater and more detailed understanding of the status, operations, challenges and possible
    solutions, for the 3 criminal tribunals operating on the continent;


                                                          2
                      Impact of International Criminal Justice in the East African Region

                                                    22 – 24 March 2007
                                         Great Rift Valley Lodge, Naivasha, Kenya

                              Initiative Supported by Open Society Initiative for East Africa and
                                    The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation



b) A clear consensus on what the region’s lawyers can do, to improve the impact of international
   criminal law in the region, and the institutionalization of peace, security and development; and
c) Hopefully, a working group with a clear plan of action on how we take the agenda forward
   from here (on the above proposed consensus).

11.00 – 12.30 ICC, ICTR, SCiSL: Contributions and Challenges in Africa
Three of the main international criminal tribunals currently operate in Africa: the International Criminal Tribunal
for Rwanda, the Special Court in Sierra Leone and the International Criminal Court. As well as providing updates
on the work of each tribunal, this session will critically ask: what have the tribunals done well and what have the
challenges been?

Chair:
Ms. Binaifer Nowrojee (OSIEA)
Presenters:
Dr. Rod Rastan (ICC)
Mr. Joseph Kamara (SCiSL)
Mr. Richard Karegyesa (ICTR)

Ms. Binaifer Nowrojee (OSIEA)

Where are the Africans in the international justice system? The Courts are seen as success stories,
but where are they? Should they be the accused and the victims only? Why, if the vast majority of
the work done is located in Africa, the Africans are not more implicated and integrated within the
Courts. The same applies to students and journalists.

Therefore, we have to ask ourselves what we want from these Courts. We should start having cross-
border dialogues and sharing our thoughts on the benefits for Africans, the challenges and
limitations of the Courts and what to do about them.

Dr. Rod Rastan (ICC)

The ICC is one of the most recent developments of international justice. Currently, 104 States are
parties. Until now, they decided to focus on the most extreme cases: DRC, Northern Uganda and
now Sudan, the latter being referred to the Court from the Security Council.

In the past, one of the complaints was that western countries were not willing to spend money in
Africa. Most recently, we have seen examples of international criminal justice being pursued in many
countries such as Cambodia, Iraq, and Lebanon. But most of the work is now done in Africa, in
particular in the Great lakes region.

The ICC has a limited jurisdiction, which explains why the concentrated their efforts in this one
particular region. Also, the jurisdiction is based on the principle of complementary: it doesn’t have
supremacy over domestic authorities, which means that if they can and are willing to prosecute the


                                                              3
                     Impact of International Criminal Justice in the East African Region

                                                  22 – 24 March 2007
                                       Great Rift Valley Lodge, Naivasha, Kenya

                            Initiative Supported by Open Society Initiative for East Africa and
                                  The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation

cases themselves, they have the right to act accordingly. As such, the main responsibility doesn’t lie
with international Courts, but within national Courts: the ICC intervention should only be in
extraordinary cases, except in the gravity of the exactions and the failure to act of national
governments encourage the court intervention.

From this situation, one key challenge emerges: enforcement being in the hands of the partner
States, cooperation becomes crucial. However, some stakeholders still see the Court wrongly as a
conflict prevention mechanism.

Mr. Joseph Kamara (SCiSL)

The SCiSL is a unique institution because it’s not part of the international justice system. It has a
mandate to evaluate the war exactions.

It’s difficult to pursue this mission so the Court decided to focus its action on those mainly
responsible for the exactions. Even though they don’t have as many inductees as we should expect,
defense lawyer intentionally slow down the procedures, by calling too many witnesses, which has the
result of discrediting the prosecution.

The SCiSL has many particularities: it’s cost effective, fast-paced, and for the first time an
International Court is based in the same country where the exactions occurred, which helps, by
outreach programs, to educate the population and report effectively to them.

Furthermore, the creation of the office of the principle defendant helped achieving the objectives of
the Court, which represent a step forward for international justice.

In general, the Court contributed to the development of the rule of law in the country and in the
region: wherever you are and whatever your status, the rule of law applies to you. It also
communicates effectively and on a active basis with the civil society: the benefits go both ways, in
achieving each others objectives in regard with the Court. Finally, it develops the legal profession.

Mr. Richard Karegyesa (ICTR)

Little account of what happened before Nuremberg in the international justice system, which was
the first real example of its creation. In fact, there was a failure to prosecute the dictators before that
time. Since then, three possibilities occur when facing atrocities: direct vengeance, fake trials and
victims’ trials.

The ICTR was created by direct intervention of the Security Council under Chapter 7, as it was one
year before for Yugoslavia. The ICTR, after a shaky start, was responsible to prosecute those
responsible for the genocide under international criminal law. Facing almost one million deaths in
100 days: who do you prosecute? In that regard, the focus was put on the leadership that led to
genocide.
By doing so, the Tribunal is facing many challenges:


                                                            4
                    Impact of International Criminal Justice in the East African Region

                                                 22 – 24 March 2007
                                      Great Rift Valley Lodge, Naivasha, Kenya

                           Initiative Supported by Open Society Initiative for East Africa and
                                 The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation

       this type of justice is not victim centered, but perpetrator centered;
       there’s also a need to include reconciliation aspect and not only prosecution aspects;
       over bureaucratization mechanism of the Court, being a UN Tribunal, contradicts the
        success of the SCiSL, a hybrid Court;
       language and cultural backgrounds barriers;
       70 accused that were arrested in 25 different countries, all that without a internal police force
        and without effective intervention by the governments which harbored them.

Following these presentations, these comments were made:

   Article 30 of the ICC Statute states that the Security Council can refer a case to the ICC even
    when the countries are not parties of the Treaty, therefore extending the Court jurisdiction.
   Even in they are not saying it eloquently enough, all three Courts have time constraints and
    include a mandate for reconciliation, while prosecuting those who bare the more responsibilities.
    In that regard, what do we do to build gender capacity, in regard to Court mechanisms?
   The outreach program of the SCiSL worked very well and is seen as an example to follow by
    other Courts, in order to achieve the fundamental objectives of international justice. Therefore,
    successes are greater then challenges. These outreach programmes also participate in localizing
    international justice, for it not to be seen as western orientated.
   Sudan is not a State party of the Rome Statute: Given the complementary principle of the Court,
    how do we intend to make the prosecution process work? Also, regarding complementary, what
    to do with governments who don’t want to act? Moreover, what would happen if the
    government of Sudan refuses to collaborate with the ICC? What would be the next step?
   What has the ICTR done to ensure that the Rwandan national Courts are ready to handle the
    cases that would be transferred to them? As a consequence, what are the difficulties arising from
    implementing international justice nationally? Also, why hold trials in Africa if we can’t ensure
    the personal security of the victims and the witnesses: should we send them all to La Hague?
   We say that the SCISL has been cost effective, but how do we explain it?
   What are the links between Truth Commissions and Special Courts, especially in the Sierra
    Leone example?
   The reason why African lawyers are not more involved in international justice is because public
    law is not more included in their curriculum: it’s optional, not mandatory. Can we modify the
    university curriculum to include such classes?

Moreover, the following responses were given by the presenters:

Dr. Rod Rastan (ICC)

The ICC as a scope for victim’s participation in two forms: from the proceeds of criminal activities
and from a trust found to compensate them, when the latter will be created




                                                           5
                       Impact of International Criminal Justice in the East African Region

                                                     22 – 24 March 2007
                                          Great Rift Valley Lodge, Naivasha, Kenya

                               Initiative Supported by Open Society Initiative for East Africa and
                                     The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation

About the possibility of referral from the Security Council, the situation is problematic because it
allows the process to become politic in essence; which is better in any cases then to rely on ad hoc
tribunals.

Based on the complementary principle, in the interest of justice, it’s better for the ICC not to
intervene in order not to disrupt the peace process: this exceptional decision should be seen in a
really narrow scope. As such, one of the key bases of the complementary principle is to place the
primary responsibility on national Courts, to encourage them to act and implement legislations. In
that regard, the ICC is unique.

The three Courts are different models: we shouldn’t see them as finality, but as tools. They all have
their utility, depending on the situations.

Mr. Joseph Kamara (SCiSL)

The SCISL, in order to be cost-effective, have implemented rules regarding witness management.
Also, because the Court is funded by donors, they formed a management council, which helps it to
be cost effective.

Witness and victim protection is the real challenge, which makes the investigation hard because of
the uncertainty resulting of that obstacle. We have to strictly protect their identity, this being harder
when it comes to mid-level commanders because they are still leaving in the same communities then
the victims. This situation explains why the prosecution concentrates their efforts on the leaders.

Mr. Richard Karegyesa (ICTR)

Regarding the Completion Strategies Document, Rule 11 applies to transfer of inductees. Therefore,
the conditions are the following: national laws should be harmonized with international justice
mechanisms; non application of the death penalty to the inductees transferred to their jurisdiction;
insurance that they have sufficient capacity to take over the cases. As a result, countries of the region
can learn from the ICTR experience and modify their practices to make them conform to
international standards.


1.30 – 3.00 Has the ICTR had Any Impact in Rwanda and East Africa?

With the ICTR drawing to a close, what has its impact been in Rwanda and the East African region as a whole?
What are the perceptions of the ICTR in Rwanda? Has its work strengthened the capacity of the national criminal
justice system in Rwanda and other countries in the region to prosecute crimes under international law? How will the
ICTR’s completion strategy contribute to developing mechanisms to combating impunity in the region?

Chair:
Justine Mirembe (HAGURUKA)
Presenters:


                                                               6
                    Impact of International Criminal Justice in the East African Region

                                                 22 – 24 March 2007
                                      Great Rift Valley Lodge, Naivasha, Kenya

                           Initiative Supported by Open Society Initiative for East Africa and
                                 The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation

Mr. John Mudakikwa (AJPRODHO)
Dr. Alex Obote Odora (ICTR)
Dr. Khoti Chilomba Kamanga (Centre for the Study of Forced Migration)

Justine Mirembe (HAGURUKA)

Currently, no proper capacity-building mechanisms exist, especially in regard of national courts.
There are no reconciliation aspects neither, which implies that the victims have been more
victimized that protected. On that aspect, the women networks are building on to empower them in
better defending their interests. Also, the distance would not have been a problem if a proper
outreach program had been put in place. All this should be put under the account of the ICTR
failure to act.

Mr. John Mudakikwa (AJPRODHO)

Rwanda has asked for the establishment of the Tribunal, but it voted again at the UN mainly
because of the issue of the venue. There was an understanding that some procedure should be
conducted in Rwanda but so far, no substantive procedure have be help in that country. At first, this
situation existed because of the possibility of imposing death penalty to the inductees.

The slow pace of the Tribunal is also a problem. While this problem was acknowledges, why have it
waited until now to adopt procedures to fasten the pace? It shows a lack of seriousness in its
commitment to prosecute those responsible of the crimes. We also have to put that slowness on the
account of the Rwanda government, which have retired its collaboration in the procedures.

However, some positives have been done for the judicial system in Rwanda, such as the abolition of
the death penalty.

Dr. Alex Obote Odora (ICTR)

Structurally, there were some problems. For instance, the judges have been nominated before the
prosecution and the investigation teams.

So far, only one Rule 11b transferal has been made to the Netherlands Court. It shows that these
transfers are not automatic. Some issues have to be addressed, such as the jurisdiction and the
capacity of the Court.

Dr. Khoti Chilomba Kamanga (Centre for the Study of Forced Migration)

We need to address this dilemma: glass half empty or half full?

We well know the consequences of the conflict: brutality of the genocide, massive displacement,
insecurity in the region. But we can’t use these facts to diminish the importance of the Tribunal. For



                                                           7
                    Impact of International Criminal Justice in the East African Region

                                                 22 – 24 March 2007
                                      Great Rift Valley Lodge, Naivasha, Kenya

                           Initiative Supported by Open Society Initiative for East Africa and
                                 The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation

instance, the ICTR has advance jurisprudence regarding genocide and the Geneva Convention. In
such, it has then done some laudable work.

Therefore, how do we compare the work achieved by the ICTR in regard of other important
international Tribunal such as Leipzig and Nuremberg? By doing so, we need to realize that it has
done important work. We can mention some impact on teaching, research and outreach aspects. It
has also stimulated moot Courts, researchers Forum, lecturers on IHL and the creation of the
African of Yearbook on Human Rights. Finally, concerning the practice of lawyers, it has
contributed to raise awareness over these issues.

Considering the preceding, the glass is half full, especially in regard of the achievements since the
creation of the ICTR.

Ms. Binaifer Nowrojee (OSIEA)

Because the ICTR was the first Criminal Tribunal created, it served as an experimental laboratory.
Thus, the victims had to suffer the highest burden, unfortunately.

Following these presentations, these comments were made:

   The distance was great between the sites of the Court and the genocide, but we have to put
    ourselves in the context of that time and understand the resentment that existed. Therefore, it
    was impossible to create it in Rwanda.
   Regarding Rule 11b, why Netherlands didn’t have jurisdiction and what are the criteria to follow
    for a transferal? Also, do the accused have a word to say in their transferal?
   There are some gains, but the leadership is still very weak. So, what are the solutions regarding
    political interventions?
   The ICTR doesn’t a good record on outreach mechanisms and in disseminating information. As
    a reason for this situation, we can point out that the Tribunal was never meant to be the only
    way of prosecution: a place was reserved for other means, including traditional justice. However,
    the accused can’t be transferred to Gacaca jurisdiction, because it doesn’t meet the requirements
    of due process. Also, the Rwandan law reserves all transferal to the High Court. Moreover, only
    the prosecutor can apply for transferal, the accused can’t ask for it. Finally, Rwanda has adopted
    a law that guarantee due process, which implies that transferal shouldn’t cause problems,
    especially that these trials will be monitored by international institutions.
   There’s negative perception in the population when they have the feeling that international
    justice only serve the interests of one ethnic group against the others. Therefore, transferal of
    inductees in Sierra Leone would have serious implications on justice procedures.
   One of the positive impacts of the ICTR is the abolishment of the death penalty in Rwanda,
    which was the first country of the region to do so. This could have serious effects on other
    countries. Moreover, the ICTR implication has also brought better procedures in the Rwandan
    justice system.




                                                           8
                       Impact of International Criminal Justice in the East African Region

                                                     22 – 24 March 2007
                                          Great Rift Valley Lodge, Naivasha, Kenya

                               Initiative Supported by Open Society Initiative for East Africa and
                                     The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation

Moreover, the following responses were given by the presenters:

Dr. Alex Obote Odora (ICTR)
Regarding the Rule 11b transferal, Norway ratified the Geneva Convention, but they didn’t want to
judge the inductee based on it but rather by using their own law. In that sense, they want to be able
to draft their own indictment. That’s why they now want to transfer the trial to Netherlands, which
transferal is still pending.

Only the prosecutor can decide if and where to transfer and inductee: there’s no room for venue
shopping. This is a complex process: lots of discussions have to be hold before we move forward on
that kind of motion. Because it’s so expensive, conclusive negotiations with African countries seem
unrealistic. In case of transferal, there are some areas of concern: security of the witnesses and
defense lawyer’s fees. These issues are currently looked upon. Finally, in case of transfer, if a trial
fails to meet due process standards, the prosecutor can file a motion to get the case recall to the
ICTR.

When the ICTR closes, a new Security Council resolution will be adopt to determine the conditions
of prosecution of the pending cases.

Mr. John Mudakikwa (AJPRODHO)

It shouldn’t be seen as victor’s justice: looking at the mandate at the Tribunal, we expected to see
some government officials being prosecuted, but so far it hasn’t been the case. On that aspect, there
are still investigations going on. In that regard, because the Bruyere report hasn’t been transferred to
the prosecutor office, it can’t be taken into account.

The general consent is that there’s room for improvement. As such, we should not forget that over
6000 people have been trialed in Rwanda for genocide since 1994 and that the acquittal rate is 25%,
which is comparable to any other jurisdiction.

Dr. Khoti Chilomba Kamanga (Centre for the Study of Forced Migration)

   The workshop is solely orientated on conflict zones, but isn’t there room to evaluate the impact
    of international criminal justice on non-conflict zones?


3.30 – 5.00 Has the ICC had any Impact in Uganda?

The role of the ICC has been quite controversial in the Ugandan context with the media often claiming that the ‘peace
at all costs’ position prevails. What are the reasons behind the controversy surrounding the ICC? Are responses and
perceptions of the Court uniform? What are the current objectives of the legal community when working on strategies to
combat impunity and how can these strategies best be strengthened?

Chair:


                                                               9
                   Impact of International Criminal Justice in the East African Region

                                                22 – 24 March 2007
                                     Great Rift Valley Lodge, Naivasha, Kenya

                          Initiative Supported by Open Society Initiative for East Africa and
                                The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation

Ms. Lorna McGregor (International Bar Association)
Presenters:
Mr. Jude Atiang (Uganda Law Society)
Mr. Henry Kilama Komakech (Komakech-Kilama & Co., Advocates)
Mr. Moses Adriko (MMAKS Advocates)
Ms. Lina Zedriga (African Centre for Research and Legal Studies)

Ms. Lorna McGregor (International Bar Association)

The Ugandan case was referred to the ICC by the president. This process should be seen as an
on-going context. Therefore, we should ask ourselves if the media has comprehensively studied
the Northern Uganda in regard with the ICC implication. So far, it has been portrayed negatively,
mainly because it’s seen has a tool for the Ugandan government. Also, because the ICC can’t
enforce their judgments, it is seen as useless. Moreover, it contradicts the “peace at all cost”
concept.

Is this perception true? We guess not, because important actors are not heard, the debate being
dominated by powerful governmental lobbies. Are there options that can be implemented? Is
there room for multi-sectored processes? What is the role of lawyers that that multitude of
processes?

Mr. Jude Atiang (Uganda Law Society)

Since 1995, general Museveni is fighting the LRA in Northern Uganda, which explains in part
why the case of LRA has been referred to the ICC.

So far, we don’t know what the objectives of LRA are because they don’t have any political
agenda, creating a unique situation. The reference of the case has at least brought international
attention on the genocide going on in the region. We also began to see signs of accountability.
However, since no evidence has been put forward, it’s difficult for us lawyers to know what is
going on. Moreover, we realize that the nature of the investigation is secretive, which doesn’t
help civil society neither putting forward their agenda.

At the beginning of the process, collaboration between civil society and legal community was
good, but now it’s not as complementary, which brings the following dilemma: what way to we
pursue? In that regard, the victims have never been consulted, so it’s hard for them to participate
in the peace process and support the ICC implication in the conflict. Also, because of the cultural
attachment to land, the population would be ready to go back home following the peace process
without prosecuting the ones responsible for the conflict. This perception may however be
wrong. In fact, they have to be prosecuted, weakening therefore the “peace at all cost” concept.

Mr. Henry Kilama Komakech (Komakech-Kilama & Co., Advocates)



                                                         10
                   Impact of International Criminal Justice in the East African Region

                                                22 – 24 March 2007
                                     Great Rift Valley Lodge, Naivasha, Kenya

                          Initiative Supported by Open Society Initiative for East Africa and
                                The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation

People are angry with the ICC because they don’t understand its mandate, so it has to be
clarified. Also, the mandate doesn’t include the exactions that occurred before the accession into
power of the now ruling party, which means that a lot of the worst exactions will never be
investigated. Moreover, the ICC doesn’t have an internal police. Therefore, it doesn’t have the
tools and the means to investigate effectively in the North Uganda context because it was
designed for post-conflict resolution. Finally, misconception of what constituted an exaction
worthy of investigation also contributes of the bad perception of the ICC.

The ICC is not the sole reason to explain why things go wrong, there’s also the implication of
foreign governments, i.e., the US government. People don’t understand either why amnesty is
granted to some fighters: what are the reasons for doing so and the objectives we’re after?
Finally, because the terms used by the ICC may not be well understood by the population in
general, more effective communication is needed.

Ms. Lina Zedriga (African Centre for Research and Legal Studies)

“Peace needs women and women need justice”

We need to empower those who have suffered under the conflict, especially women. Women’
bodies are often used as battlegrounds, with all the painful consequences. Nevertheless, women
are not present at the negotiating table, only having an observatory status. They are therefore
demanding for justice at all cost and for reparation. Currently, they are still without power, even
though they are the ones who suffer the most.

A big gap exists between the presence of the ICC and the rights of the victims, which we need to
address. As such, rape is still a rampant problem: whether there is peace or conflict, women’
bodies are still used. For instance, 70% of women that have been raped have seen their cases
defiled. We understand that the prosecution process is hard but we need to better investigate
these exactions in order to secure this process and keep it going.

Mr. Moses Adriko (MMAKS Advocates)

The principal impact of the ICC has been to catalyze the debate on traditional justice. The actual
exactions are unparallel in the collective traditions in Northern Uganda, thus making our
traditional justice system unable to deal legally with genocide issues.

So far, Uganda has been a victim of impunity. The presence of the ICC is therefore very
welcomed because there’s no guarantee that this situation will stop in the future. Concerning the
peace process, the reference to the ICC has also catalyzed the debate. There’s a feeling that the
Rome Statute will ensure the end of impunity, if implemented properly. Thus, the role of lawyers
is to persuade the Bar Association and Human Rights Organizations of the possible impact of the
Rome Statute and how to use it for further actions, while raising awareness on its implications.



                                                         11
                    Impact of International Criminal Justice in the East African Region

                                                 22 – 24 March 2007
                                      Great Rift Valley Lodge, Naivasha, Kenya

                           Initiative Supported by Open Society Initiative for East Africa and
                                 The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation

More generally, there are other issues that have to be brought to the table, as the feeling within
Northern Uganda that they are marginalized even though they are the vast majority. Therefore,
now it’s time to test institutions, nationals and internationals, to take our politicians into account.

Following these presentations, these comments were made:

Ms. Christine Birabwa (Uganda Human Rights Commission)

The Ugandan situation can be interpreted as a conflict between the north and the south. As a
result, in the north, there’s a belief that the exactions are committed by the LAR and the UPDF,
so they don’t understand why just one side is investigated upon. Therefore, they see the ICC as
an arm of the government, a political strategy playing all actors at the same time, which creates
uncertainty. Moreover, they will take advantage of the ignorance of the people in order to use the
presence of the ICC to serve their own interests.

Dr. Alex Obote Odora (ICTR)

Even in the scholar community, it’s not clear what the ICC is actually doing. The ICC is always
used as political tool, because under the rules of referral (13a and 14), it is necessary to name the
perpetrators of the exactions. If they don’t investigate the broader range of exactions, then the
ICC is irrelevant. Therefore, we should ask ourselves what is the system you want to use and do
you aim to achieve with it. As such, have to take into account that the crimes committed between
1986 and 2002, while overlapping in many cases, are not investigated. Also, focusing only on
peace is wrong because this process has to be conducted in parallel with the legal investigations.

Dr. Rod Rastan (ICC)

In fact, the referral gives the mandate to the ICC to investigate the situation in Northern Uganda
as a whole: there’s a misunderstanding on this. The government of Uganda could be held
responsible too, because the two sides will be investigated upon. The investigators intentionally
limit the number of victims they interrogate, mainly for protection purposes. Also, the ICC may
be used as a smoke screen in regard of the peace process, many stories being exaggerated to
divert the debate from certain issues.

Other participants:

   The ICC may be badly perceived because it’s dealing with problems of a magnitude never
    seen before. Therefore, does it have the tools to meet its mandate? However, this magnitude
    should not have the effect of putting aside traditional justice mechanisms.
   Maybe we should follow the Sierra Leone example, where the Security Council has decided
    to prosecute all parties and not only the one selected by the ruling party, as in the Ugandan
    case. As a result, the population will stop seeing the ICC as a political tool.
   Is there a forum for different actors to open dialogue?


                                                          12
                      Impact of International Criminal Justice in the East African Region

                                                    22 – 24 March 2007
                                         Great Rift Valley Lodge, Naivasha, Kenya

                              Initiative Supported by Open Society Initiative for East Africa and
                                    The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation

   Is there a particular standard that has been used to determine what kind of exactions has to be
    committed in order for a group to be held responsible?
   Amnesty isn’t a practical solution in regard of the exactions committed, but how serious is
    the government of Uganda in that referral process?

Moreover, the following responses were given by the presenters:

Ms. Lina Zedriga (African Centre for Research and Legal Studies)

Currently, there’s no forum existing for dialogue purposes.

Mr. Jude Atiang (Uganda Law Society)

The Ugandan government has benefited from the presence of the ICC. Whatever happens, the
government will use this presence for its own agenda.

Also, LRA can’t be seen as a group, because they don’t have the same level of responsibility.
Therefore, only the leaders should be prosecuted. In order to do, first we will have to adopt
standards to facilitate the process.

Mr. Henry Kilama Komakech (Komakech-Kilama & Co., Advocates)

The ICC should take a lead in the actual context of denial and stop relying on the information
given to them by the government. Hopefully, the referral consequences will be good, even
though the actual referral was seen negatively.

Mr. Moses Adriko (MMAKS Advocates)

Why, after using common law procedure for 100 years, now that genocide has been committed,
we want to go back to traditional justice? Therefore, there’s a urgent need for dialogue forums in
order to disseminate information efficiently.


DAY 2 Friday, 23 March 2007
9.30 – 11.00 Has the ICC had any Impact in Sudan?

The ICC’s Office of the Prosecutor has applied to the Pre-Trial Chamber to issue two summonses to appear against
the former Minister of State for the Interior and a leader of the Janjaweed. What have the reactions been to the
request? Why was there such a strong lobby for the involvement of the ICC in Sudan in the first place? Has the Court
met expectations? What have the successes and challenges been for lawyers working on international crimes in Sudan?

Chair:


                                                             13
                    Impact of International Criminal Justice in the East African Region

                                                 22 – 24 March 2007
                                      Great Rift Valley Lodge, Naivasha, Kenya

                           Initiative Supported by Open Society Initiative for East Africa and
                                 The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation

Dr. Yitiha Simbeye (International Refugee Rights Initiative)
Presenters:
Mr. Ameir Mohamed Suliman (Khartoum Centre for Human Rights and Environmental
Development)
Ms. Naglaa Elmahi Elkhalifa (Independent Lawyer)
Mr. Mohamed Elhahgoub Abdalla Abd Elwhab (Independent Lawyer)

Dr. Yitiha Simbeye (International Refugee Rights Initiative)

The crisis is the biggest one after the one in Rwanda The situation in the camps being grave, the
main challenge now is to protect the civilians.

Mr. Mohamed Elhahgoub Abdalla Abd Elwhab (Independent Lawyer)

After the crisis in Darfur and the escalation of the conflict, the flow of refugees increased to
neighboring countries, especially in Chad. As a result of these forced migrations of civilians, three
main camps were created. In that particular aspect, the role of the government was negative.
Therefore, the civil society took the leadership role, in many aspects, like clothing, food, education,
health, and training according to their needs and capacities. Consequently, confidence and trust were
built between CSOs and refugees.

On the other hand, the government of Sudan used militias to achieve their political agenda, mainly
to marginalize the people in Darfur. Massive graves have recently been found, putting the
government in an even more difficult situation. Alongside the exactions, we have monitored many
Human Rights violations, mainly rapes.

The official objective of the government was to protect the territory, but in fact, the militias were
used to conduct exactions, which explains why the government then provided diplomatic
protections to the perpetrators of the crimes.

Thus, the decree of august 2005 issued by the ministry of Justice have laid a strict procedure hard to
implement, which make almost impossible to prosecute them. For instance, before the case goes on,
the minister of Defense, the Prosecutor General and the minister of Justice has to be satisfied by the
evidence put forward. Even then, there’s no obligation for the case to be prosecuted.

Despite these immunities, which are contrary to the Constitution, the Parliament has done nothing
to amend the decree, mainly because the governing party also controls the Assembly. Therefore,
they tried to convey a Constitutional Assembly to determine if the decree is unconstitutional. So far,
they haven’t succeeded.

So far, out of 51 suspects, only 2 were officially inducted. The population expecting more, they are
now turning to the ICC for a better legal action. As a result of local and international pressures, the
government of Sudan was forced to amend the decree and remove the protections given to the
perpetrators of crimes against humanity. Also, the government amended other laws to implement


                                                          14
                    Impact of International Criminal Justice in the East African Region

                                                 22 – 24 March 2007
                                      Great Rift Valley Lodge, Naivasha, Kenya

                           Initiative Supported by Open Society Initiative for East Africa and
                                 The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation

international standards, such as signing the Rome Statute and the conventions on crimes against
humanity.

Mr. Ameir Mohamed Suliman (Khartoum Centre for Human Rights and Environmental
Development)

There are two different kinds of ethnic groups in Sudan: Africans, mainly farmers, and Arabs, mainly
nomads.

Sudan was before old Islamic kingdoms, until the unification in the 18th century. It was conquered
by the English in 1916 and obtained its independence in 1956. Since then, the history of the country
is based on the balance between military and democratic regimes. There was a democratic regime
from 1985 to 1989, which supported mainly the Arab tribes, thus contributing to the beginning of
the conflict. This era was marked by the 1986 famine.

The military regime of El Bashir started in 1989, which increased the conflict by the installment of
well-equipped Arab tribe militias. The objective was to protect the regime from SPLA. It’s at that
time that the Janjaweed emerged.

To resolve the crisis, the strategy of the government was based on military solution, political
solution and legal mechanisms. As a result, they created special courts in 2001, 2003 and 2005. In
2001, lawyers were not allowed to represent the inductees. In 2003, they could represent them but
not fully and not in all procedures. Finally, in 2005, the present Court was created to ensure that the
criminals were not taken before the ICC. However, the crimes were not considered as crimes.

International organizations helped in that process the civil society, mainly in form of legal aid. But
problems remained. For instance, in cases of adultery, the victim was also considered as criminals.
The result is that most victims, especially women, don’t trust the legal system, that’s why they want
the implication of the ICC. These organizations also established strategies to outreach the victims.
They go directly to them and help them with a wide range of issues: health, legal aid, education and
training.

In the legal community, some lawyers don’t want the ICC to be part of the process. They argue that
Sudan hasn’t ratified the Rome Statute and that the Sudan Courts are willing to take over the cases.
On the other hand, some others are opting for the ICC implication because the Courts are not able
to take over these cases. Unfortunately, the Bar Association supported the government on rejecting
the ICC.

Ms. Naglaa Elmahi Elkhalifa (Independent Lawyer)

The ICC visited Sudan for investigation 6 times and received other reports from international
organizations. They now accused 2 criminals and requested the creation of a special Court to hear
the cases. The Sudan government responded that no evidence was found against the first inductee
and that he was not a Janjaweed leader. Moreover, he was never held in detention, thus contradicting


                                                          15
                    Impact of International Criminal Justice in the East African Region

                                                 22 – 24 March 2007
                                      Great Rift Valley Lodge, Naivasha, Kenya

                           Initiative Supported by Open Society Initiative for East Africa and
                                 The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation

the government position. On the legal, they maintain that because they haven’t ratified the Rome
Statute, the ICC has no legal basis, therefore adding that the Sudanese Courts are qualified to take
over the cases. This position is confirmed by the dean of the Bar Association.

On the political side, they try to politicize the role of the ICC by trying to discriminate its action and
emphasizes that the situation is politically motivated. To bypass the government on that issue, the
SPLM even suggested that the ICC moves directly to Sudan under Rule 3c in order to prevent the
government not to hand over the suspects. As such, there are bases for challenging the refusal of
accepting the ICC jurisdiction. For instance, the Okambo’s report confirms that there’s a genocide
going on in Darfur. However, on March 18th, the Sudanese government officially refused to deal
with ICC in regard of the suspects. They also refused to send legal experts to La Hague. However,
the government has recently agreed to be investigated, saying that they are not above the law

Following these presentations, these comments were made:

Dr. Rod Rastan (ICC)

It’s the first time that an investigator conducted the investigation without ever going to the territory.
It was not so important to go because a lot of evidence was accessible outside the country, which
helped in reducing the risks and increased the protection to witnesses. Even though the first two
accused are senior governmental officials, the process is just starting.

The ICC would be happy if the Sudan government was challenging the jurisdiction of the Court, but
they are not doing it so far.

Others:

   The issue of peace and justice is like the riddle of the egg and the chicken: what should come
    first? The two should come together, their actions being complementary.
   What are the government responsibilities and how do we act on it?
   Are the actions of NGOs so honest?
   How the ICC propose to act regarding the concept of complementary and the fact that Sudan is
    not part of the Rome Statute?
   Considering the controversy between the government and the ICC, how can the ICC conduct
    the investigations?
   Most of the victims are women and children whom can’t access international justice. Moreover,
    the police are only helping when the crimes are not committed by government officials.
   Also, the government is creating barriers to ensure that justice is slowed down as much as
    possible
   All the work of the ICC is done when there’s still conflict, so how can it work?

Moreover, the following responses were given by the presenters:




                                                          16
                        Impact of International Criminal Justice in the East African Region

                                                      22 – 24 March 2007
                                           Great Rift Valley Lodge, Naivasha, Kenya

                                Initiative Supported by Open Society Initiative for East Africa and
                                      The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation

Mr. Mohamed Elhahgoub Abdalla Abd Elwhab (Independent Lawyer)

The Constitutional Court has been established and for the first time they are filling a case against
many laws, such as the Police Act, the Emergency Law and the 2005 Decree. The Court also wants
to eliminate the immunities in order to prosecute more suspects.

Mr. Ameir Mohamed Suliman (Khartoum Centre for Human Rights and Environmental
Development)

Before 1999, no women were allowed to be named judge. Now, they are 4 judges, but none in the
constitutional Court.

The Special Court was created to fill the gaps in regard of the complementary concept. Also, the
Constitutional Court can look at cases under the International Humanitarian Law, but no
punishment can be imposed.


11.30 – 1.00 Developing Outreach Strategies

The ICC, the ICTR and the SCiSL all have outreach programmes within their mandate but have these tribunals
interacted adequately with the communities most affected? Should outreach form a central component of a tribunal’s
work? Are there examples of effective outreach strategies? How can the legal community challenge these tribunals to
improve their outreach activities? What are the priorities and strategies available to the legal communities themselves to
generate awareness on international criminal justice?

Chair:
Ms. Lorna McGregor (International Bar Association)
Presenters:
Ms. Binta Mansaray (SCiSL)
Dr. Alex Obote Odora (ICTR)
Ms. Angelina Namakula (IBA Working Group in Uganda)

Ms. Lorna McGregor (International Bar Association)

In the case of the ICTR, the lack of outreach is a major problem, which is worsened by the
distance gap. With the ICC, the most difficult is that outreach is problematic when we are
focusing on only one community. How would it work then when we are dealing with more than
one community?

The ICC is the first Tribunal which includes reparations to victims in the proceedings, which
they should advertise Therefore, what should be the best outreach mechanisms? What would be
the role of civil society in that regard?




                                                               17
                   Impact of International Criminal Justice in the East African Region

                                                22 – 24 March 2007
                                     Great Rift Valley Lodge, Naivasha, Kenya

                          Initiative Supported by Open Society Initiative for East Africa and
                                The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation

Ms. Binta Mansaray (SCiSL)

The outreach section was created 6 months after the Court to explain its work. After 11 years of
civil war, the population was divided over victims/perpetrators lines. Therefore, it was an
obligation of the Court to make people understand its role and put mechanisms in place to do so.
Freedom of speech was central: comments could be negative and positive.

Offices and networks were established, to make sure that everybody was reached. The people in
charge were always coming from their own communities to ensure that people could identify
themselves in the Court.

There are two types of programmes: general outreach, to reach the general population as a
whole; and targeted outreach, in order to be meaningful to people for whom the Court was
created for. For instance, they had to elaborate on the mandate of the Court and explain the
decisions of the prosecutor, especially on children who committed crimes. They also targeted the
former combatants to explain the due process of the Court not for them to feel persecuted.
Finally, they had to explain the “greatest responsibility concept”, which implies that only the
leaders are prosecuted.

To achieve their long-term objectives, they documented questions to monitor trends and design
programs accordingly. For instance, they moved from indictment to security.

At the beginning, lawyers were not convinced of the interest of creating an outreach program
within the Court. Their vision was justice for all. Because they were not part of prosecution or
defense, they always remained neutral. Now, the outreach network contains 150 individuals
coming from 30 CSOs.

Courts should not only be retributive, but also be part of the healing process: it has been their
motto since the beginning.

Dr. Alex Obote Odora (ICTR)

The ICTR was not dealing with completion strategy before resolution 1503. Therefore, they were
conducing outreach strategies but without budget, which explains their failure.

But important questions have to be asked. First, where the archives should be located? Different
positions are possibles: New York, because it was created by the UN; La Hague, because it’s the
center of international criminal justice; Rwanda, for obvious reasons; and Arusha. Should we
fight for the archives to stay in Arusha? Also, what about confidential documents? What would
be the access modalities, in regard of security issues?

Second, under Rule 120, the prosecutor have one year to ask for review after the appeal process.
On the other hand, the accused have indefinite time to file for review if new evidences are found.


                                                         18
                   Impact of International Criminal Justice in the East African Region

                                                22 – 24 March 2007
                                     Great Rift Valley Lodge, Naivasha, Kenya

                          Initiative Supported by Open Society Initiative for East Africa and
                                The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation

Moreover, what happens to those who are acquitted and to those who are released after they
served their sentences?

These two situations would need an outreach program to broadly open dialogue.

Ms. Angelina Namakula (IBA Working Group in Uganda)

The biggest problem is that politicians talk with misconceptions, which makes outreach more
difficult. We need to explain to the people the mandate of the ICC, so that our voices are louder
than the ones of the politicians.

Also, the rest of the country doesn’t feel involve in the process. They think is a Northern Uganda
problem. To achieve that, the issues are dealt with a Human Rights perspective, not a legal one.
That’s the orientation they want to give to the programme. They also have to explain why the
ICC needs to succeed and help them to differentiate the peace process and the role of the ICC.

Third, they want to broader the debate and train young lawyers to international justice and
increase the sensibility of lawyers on it. This would ultimately have the result to put forward a
united front from all the actors, after proper coordination, in which more lawyers should be
included. As a way forward, this group of activists would be able to better discussed victims
reparation, especially with parliamentarians.

Following these presentations, these comments were made:

   What is the budget development of the Sierra Leone outreach program? Who covers the
    costs? Who is giving the mandate to the outreach section in Sierra Leone? What are the
    indicators of success? Is it proper to engage perpetrators in outreach programs? Why do we
    need outreach programs in the first place? Lack of legitimacy? Failure of the government?
   The outreach is also crucial for prosecutors and other Court actors because it explains their
    work. As a result, now the population is very well aware of the rules of the Court.
   So far, we don’t know what to do with the originals of the Court documents. The situation
    may be different with the electronic documents. In that debate, what is the role of lawyers
    and Law Societies? Also, why just have one repository?
   Smaller is better when it comes to outreach.

Moreover, the following responses were given by the presenters:

Dr. Alex Obote Odora (ICTR)

We should participate in the Archive’s site debate. Because the judgments of the Court and of
the people maybe different, this arises security concerns. That’s why we need to ensure the
protection of confidential documents.



                                                         19
                      Impact of International Criminal Justice in the East African Region

                                                    22 – 24 March 2007
                                         Great Rift Valley Lodge, Naivasha, Kenya

                              Initiative Supported by Open Society Initiative for East Africa and
                                    The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation

Ms. Angelina Namakula (IBA Working Group in Uganda)

We need to include a cross-section of lawyers to participate in outreach and the working group.
The ULS also need to be consulted, mainly because it’s also participating in the Coalition for the
ICC. As such, the workshop is orientated to lawyers, making their participation important.

Ms. Binta Mansaray (SCiSL)

The outreach programme is not funded by the Court. The European Union is funding them.
Should outreach become part of the Court? Yes. It would help address victim’s rights and unite
the country. Already, they derive their authority from the Court, which created them, but are free
to do whatever they want.

We can’t measure success; it’s more like a feeling. For instance, now they care more about due
process than before.


2.00 – 5.30 Bringing International Law Home: Regional and National Justice Mechanisms

How can we use the experiences and jurisprudence of the ICC, ICTR, SCISL, the African Commission on Human
and People’s Rights and the African Union to address impunity for crimes under international law? How can we use
national courts (domestic and foreign) to deal with international crimes? What efforts have been undertaken to
implement the Rome Statute as well as other international treaties such as the Convention against Torture? What has
worked and what has not?

Chair:
Mugambi Kiai (Programme Officer – Open Society Initiative for East Africa)
Presenters:
Prof. Chris Maina Peter (Faculty of Law, University of Dar es Salaam)
Mr. Izzeldin Osman Fateh Elrhman (Sudan Human Rights Group, Sudan)
Ms. Christine Birabwa (Uganda Human Rights Commission)
Dr. Yitiha Simbeye (International Refugee Rights Initiative)

Mugambi Kiai (Programme Officer – Open Society Initiative for East Africa)

Is international law African or westerner? How do we bring international law home? What are we
bringing home? Jurisprudence? Procedures?

Prof. Chris Maina Peter (Faculty of Law, University of Dar es Salaam)

In an era of globalization, it’s impossible to ignore international law: we have to position ourselves.
Many possibilities exist.



                                                             20
                    Impact of International Criminal Justice in the East African Region

                                                 22 – 24 March 2007
                                      Great Rift Valley Lodge, Naivasha, Kenya

                           Initiative Supported by Open Society Initiative for East Africa and
                                 The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation

First, we should consider the implementation of training on international law, understood broadly,
in schools and universities. As a young age, if people understand basic concepts such as the role of
State and sovereignty, it will he them as citizens. At the university level, we even have to go further.
So far, the emphasis has been put on training practitioners to work as bureaucrats. Now, we have to
put more efforts on training on international law by making mandatory such classes, which will help
students getting jobs in international organizations.

Second, we also have to train judges on the same subjects. We have to fight their ignorance and their
conservatism by teaching them, cordially, the vast possibilities of authority coming from
international Courts. Furthermore, we need to mainstream the formation and introduce specialized
websites for judges.

Third, we should make sure to send competent teams to negotiate for international legal instrument.
We currently select people on other criteria than competence. Therefore, as a result, the African
delegations are not participating thoroughly, at the contrary of the western delegations.

Fourth, we should participate actively in monitoring the signing and ratification processes. We need
to follow-up with the government, the parliament and the cabinet.

Fifth, we need to train NGOs in public international law, not only on Human Rights and gender
issues. Therefore, for them to have impact and to be relevant, they need to understand the broader
international justice issues. The result will be that they will be more independent from international
organizations.

Sixth, we have to pressure States to incorporate international law in national law, keeping in mind
that most African countries are dualist and not monist. The government therefore needs a push and
only competent lawyers educated in international law could give it. By doing so, we would be able to
force the adoption of international conventions that better the life of citizens.

Dr. Yitiha Simbeye (International Refugee Rights Initiative)

The biggest barrier preventing implementing process is the sovereignty defended by governments.
For instance, immunity given by governments is a barrier because it’s in contradiction with the
Rome Statute. The same applies with impunity and lack of accountability.

We need to distinguish two kinds of immunity: Diplomatic immunity and head of
State/government immunity. We further need to divide them in immunity rational materiae (can’t be
prosecuted domestically but it remains a possibility internationally, if he’s not acting as a
representative of the State) and immunity rational personae (which is the one causing problems
because it’s the one that are using African governments in general).

The immunity rational personae is complete, because head of States can’t be trailed domestically for
international crimes. Therefore, is the following idea applicable: can we include a automatic waiver
of the immunity in cases of international crimes when the Security Council is ceased of the dossier?


                                                          21
                    Impact of International Criminal Justice in the East African Region

                                                 22 – 24 March 2007
                                      Great Rift Valley Lodge, Naivasha, Kenya

                           Initiative Supported by Open Society Initiative for East Africa and
                                 The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation



Ms. Christine Birabwa (Uganda Human Rights Commission)

It’s a foremost challenge to convince a minister of the necessity to implement the standards included
in the Bill to implement the Rome Statute, mainly because of the complexity of Constitution reform
processes.

Other issues also make the process more complex. In Uganda, the biggest challenge of
implementing the Rome Statute has been the war in the North. Therefore, with the politicization of
the implementation, there’s no political will to adopt it. As a result, the need of lobbying politicians
becomes crucial. For instance, they have included dispositions on immunity in the bill, which is
contradictory to the Rome Statute.

Also, because it’s hard in people’s mind to differentiate the ICC from the war in the North, we need
to educate them.

Finally, domesticating international law can be problematic, especially when the system is dualistic.

Mr. Izzeldin Osman Fateh Elrhman (Sudan Human Rights Group, Sudan)

Can national courts deal with international crimes? It’s not currently the case in Sudan because there
are no international crime dispositions in national law. However, Sudan has agreed to be part of
many international treaties. According to the Constitution, all these treaties are part of national law.

So far, problems are arising from the disposition of treaties, mainly in the definition of the crimes.
Also, there are no dispositions in Sudan permitting punishment, which makes implementation
difficult. For instance, torture and rape are dealt with as national crimes, not international ones.

However, possible mechanisms of law reform exist, mainly within the Human Rights Commission,
through the Bill of rights, and the Constitutional Court. As such, the article 48 of the Constitution
states that all competent courts shall apply the Bill of rights. Therefore because all international
treaties are included in the Constitution by this disposition, some kind of protection exists for
international law.

Following these presentations, these comments were made:

Dr. Khoti Chilomba Kamanga (Centre for the Study of Forced Migration)

This immunity is divided in two: when they are in power and they are out of office. The first one is
absolute, but the second one only is absolute only for the acts done in office that were
constitutional. For instance, in the case of Pinochet, torture was recognized as an international
criminal offense, so he lost his immunity after leaving the office.

Dr. Rod Rastan (ICC)


                                                          22
                    Impact of International Criminal Justice in the East African Region

                                                 22 – 24 March 2007
                                      Great Rift Valley Lodge, Naivasha, Kenya

                           Initiative Supported by Open Society Initiative for East Africa and
                                 The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation



The article 27 of the Rome Statute distinguishes between personal immunity and function immunity,
which both of them are unavailable to block an extradition or any other procedures. Moreover,
article 38 deals with immunity in a third country, saying that a third State can’t waive the immunity
given to a national of another country. The same to the standard immunity enjoyed by soldiers
stationed in a third country, because the ICC Convention can’t overrule these dispositions.

Also, most of the crimes described by the Rome Statute were already existing internationally with
other conventions. It only creates few limited crimes. Most countries have adopted exactly the same
list of crimes, in order not to loose a challenge on their jurisdiction later on.

Others:

   How should we implement international law? Do we take as it is or do we modify it according to
    our own differences? We need therefore to educate people to make them understand that these
    dispositions are universal, so we can’t modify them.
   The Pinochet was a case of immunity in a foreign country, but we most struggle with the
    immunity within their own countries, after their passage in power.
   In the case of Sierra Leone, there’s jurisprudence on the lack of jurisdiction over Taylor, who
    was still head of State at that time.
   For practical reasons, we always have to wait for them to leave power, but it remains theoretical.
   How can we put international law at the center stage, especially within civil society? We need to
    find a way to make it attractive for these organizations for them to participate and be relevant.
   How can we deal with international criminal law? Does it stand on its own or shall we include in
    other disciplines? Who should take the lead in promoting implementation of the Rome Statute
    and any other international instruments?
   Why, if Sudan is part of the Geneva Convention and is a monist country, can’t the dispositions
    on torture be applicable?
   Communications between the perpetrators and the victims, or the society in general, can be
    beneficial: we shouldn’t shut the door, but we should put some limits on it
   How do we train militaries, those who are causing the most problems? Shall we go as far as
    convict’s outreach?
   What about the case of Noriega? He was in power when he was arrested and prosecuted.
   We should bring the concept of FJ under national laws.
   We should also use article 6(3) of the Rome Statute which states that when a superior should
    have known what was going on, he should be held responsible.
   What does it take for a Member of Parliament to present a private bill? As a lawyer, we should
    draft these bills for them, in order to pressure the government.
   Law societies need to be involved, but so far they use it as a patronage tool. We should therefore
    democratize nominations done by the councils. We could also learn about the ECOWAS
    experiences, which took decisions when the situation was unbearable.
   The legal community has to push for the international legal agenda to advance if we want it to
    work, in absence of political will.


                                                          23
                      Impact of International Criminal Justice in the East African Region

                                                    22 – 24 March 2007
                                         Great Rift Valley Lodge, Naivasha, Kenya

                              Initiative Supported by Open Society Initiative for East Africa and
                                    The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation

   The international conventions have supremacy over national laws, but these international
    conventions have not yet been tested in the Courts of justice.
   How have you managed to domesticate international law in Sierra Leone?

Moreover, the following responses were given by the presenters:

Dr. Yitiha Simbeye (International Refugee Rights Initiative)

After they are out of power, we need to analyze their actions while in power, because their
immunities are not theoretically absolute. Even if our ideas don’t look practical, we have to put them
in place for future use.

In the Noriega case, he was not de jure head of State

Prof. Chris Maina Peter (Faculty of Law, University of Dar es Salaam)

Donors have a say in the development of strategic plans, so it would be better to network CSOs in
order not have this kind of interference in the future.

Also, training the army is obviously important, especially officers, in international law.

Finally, in Tanzania, it’s easy to deposit private bills, personal initiatives are therefore important,
whether in parliament or elsewhere

Ms. Christine Birabwa (Uganda Human Rights Commission)

Some provisions of the Rome Stature are in contradiction with the Constitution. If they are adopted,
they’ll become law, nonetheless the other provisions.


DAY 3 Saturday, 24 March 2007

9.30 – 11.00 Interfacing ‘Alternative’ Forms of Justice with the International Courts

What is the role of ‘alternative’ forms of justice in dealing with crimes under international law? What was the
relationship between the Special Court for Sierra Leone and the Truth Commission? What are the reasons behind
using the traditional justice systems such as the gacaca courts in Rwanda and mato oput in Uganda? What are the
challenges and limitations to using these systems?

Chair:
Dr. Elizabeth Muli (Faculty of Law, Moi University)
Presenters:




                                                             24
                    Impact of International Criminal Justice in the East African Region

                                                  22 – 24 March 2007
                                       Great Rift Valley Lodge, Naivasha, Kenya

                            Initiative Supported by Open Society Initiative for East Africa and
                                  The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation

Mr. Howard Varney (South African advocate, formerly chief investigator of the Sierra Leonean
Truth and Reconciliation Commission)
Mr. Joseph Mudakikwa (AJPRODHO)
Mr. Kibwanga Rajab Adams (Norwegian Refugee Council, Uganda)

Dr. Elizabeth Muli (Faculty of Law, Moi University)

Where traditional justice fits in the international justice system?

Mr. Joseph Mudakikwa (AJPRODHO)

Gacaca is a hybrid of traditional forms of justice, which aims at resolving disputes by reconciliation.
They modern Gacaca Courts were created in 2001. As of their competences, they can trial genocide
perpetrators, which can mount to more than 700 000 persons in the categories 2 and 3.

The category 1 is reserved for classic courts of justice, which includes the worst types of crimes. The
category 2 is the broadest and includes most crimes that are associated with genocide. Finally, the
category 3 only includes crimes against property.

Currently, there are 9 011 Gacaca courts, with more than 100 000 judges. They are coordinated by
the National service of Gacaca Jurisdictions, which employs lawyers in charge of giving advices to
lawyers. The judges are persons of integrity elected by the community. As such, they should not
have participated in the genocide, be truthful, with high morals of conduct and free from
sectarianism.

The quorum of the bench is 5 judges. They work almost in the same way than a classical court, but
with the difference that the judges also act as prosecutors. Also, the public can bring evidence during
the trial either against or for the suspect. Some procedures are put in place to ensure fair trials and
respect due process. They are faster, less expensive than classic Courts and, as a result, build
confidence among Rwandans.

Mr. Kibwanga Rajab Adams (Norwegian Refugee Council, Uganda)

Mato oput is both a process and a ritual ceremony to restore relationship between clans in case of
intentional murder or accidental killing. In case of war, it should be used between the parties, not
between the victims and the perpetrators.

So far, the legal community remains skeptical and the manner is seen as highly political. However,
for the victims, it’s most of the time the only way to obtain justice.

It doesn’t deal with crimes against humanity and genocide. It’s non-deterrent and non harmonious.
Also, it’s not targeting the rights parties. I fact, the victims shouldn’t be part of the process, but
rather the beneficiaries of it.



                                                           25
                    Impact of International Criminal Justice in the East African Region

                                                 22 – 24 March 2007
                                      Great Rift Valley Lodge, Naivasha, Kenya

                           Initiative Supported by Open Society Initiative for East Africa and
                                 The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation

Moreover, by this process, the government liability is unanswered. However, it helps to rehabilitate
the abductees turned combatants. We also need to take into account the victims reparation and
reconciliation.

Finally, it complements the international criminal justice system and bridge the gap between the
North and the South

Mr. Howard Varney (South African advocate, formerly chief investigator of the Sierra
Leonean Truth and Reconciliation Commission)

Can the objectives of classic justice and truth commission be harmonized? We could argue that they
are not mutually compatible, but they can be seen as complementary.

All post-conflict countries struggle to deal with the failure of the States for many years, which brings
the necessity to find other answers than classic justice. Truth commissions and alternative to
restorative justice can help the reconciliation and healing process. It’s also seen as nation-building;
helps preserve the peace and bring people together. They don’t investigate individual cases, but
rather look at broader trends in order to help in producing an historical truth. Therefore, it serves as
a forum for people to come forward.

As a result, the recommendations are aimed at healing but foremost at making sure that the events
will not occur again. In some cases, charges can be laid against particular individuals. In selected
cases, amnesty is granted to help discover the truth as part of the healing process. In other cases,
indemnities are granted.

The creation of such commissions comes handy because in many cases classis justice is not trusted
by the population. But we need it? Is justice necessary for reconciliation? What’s the role of classic
justice?

If you don’t harmonize the objectives between the two types of justice, tensions will arise. Post-
conflict countries always have a transitional moment, in which we have the opportunity to confront
the past. Many ways forward are possible to do so, including classic justice, truth commissions or
integrated approaches of the two.

Following these presentations, these comments were made:

Dr. Rod Rastan (ICC)

If people are pleading guilty, after being in jail for 10 years, they are released. How can this be a
genuine process? In other cases, the judges are not sufficiently enough to deal with these serious
issues. On the other hand, something has to be done, if not they will remain in jail for a long time




                                                          26
                    Impact of International Criminal Justice in the East African Region

                                                 22 – 24 March 2007
                                      Great Rift Valley Lodge, Naivasha, Kenya

                           Initiative Supported by Open Society Initiative for East Africa and
                                 The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation

It’s becoming the new model: classic and traditional justices working hand in hand. But how do we
make it work? There’s a role for traditional justice, the only question is to see what should be that
role.

Dr. Alex Obote Odora (ICTR)

The two systems are complementary: we can’t choose one and abandon the other, like it seems to be
the case in Rwanda. By using traditional justice, in dealing with people ignorant of their rights, bad
compromises are possible. Can we say that the accused and the victims really want this system in this
circumstance?

We should never take conflict of the classic justice system. If we do so, we can’t achieve properly the
peace objectives and we can compound the problem.

Others

   Do victims have personals contacts with the perpetrators? How the ceremonies work regarding
    the participation of the victims in the healing process?
   There are ongoing tensions between TRC and International Courts. Both are right in their own
    competences, both they should see their work as complementary. Nowadays, it’s fashionable to
    promote traditional forms of justice, but in the meantime, the place of children and women
    within these traditional forms of justice have to improve by the way of reforms.
   In traditional justice, we understand that the well-being of one person has to be enjoyed by the
    community as a whole. As such, the principles behind traditional justice are the following: truth
    telling, voluntary process, compensation and restoration.
   The sensitivity of classic justice comes from the fact that TRC are making their work harder
    regarding the protection of witnesses, the gathering of evidence and the on-going investigations.
    Moreover, the public character of testimony before the TRC causes the most problems.
   Does the accused have the right of referral before the formal judicial system?
   How can we harmonize all the different traditional systems in order for every tribe to accept it?
   Can a woman become a judge in these traditional courts?
   Is the demand arising from the communities or the traditional forms of justice are imposed by
    the governments?
   Is it really possible for the two forms of justice to work hand in hand?
   Do the people feel that they have ownership over the traditional systems?
   Are the judges legally competent? Which laws are they applying? How works the appeal
    procedure?
   Do these traditional and reconciliation procedures take into account the violence against women
    and do they give a forum for expression?
   Do they take into account the complementary concept?
   There’s a problem of impunity, how do we deal with it?
   In Sudan, there are over 570 tribes, so traditional justice isn’t available in that context.



                                                          27
                    Impact of International Criminal Justice in the East African Region

                                                 22 – 24 March 2007
                                      Great Rift Valley Lodge, Naivasha, Kenya

                           Initiative Supported by Open Society Initiative for East Africa and
                                 The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation

Moreover, the following responses were given by the presenters:

Mr. Kibwanga Rajab Adams (Norwegian Refugee Council, Uganda)

Customary law is as important in Africa as it is in Europe so why can’t we integrate it in our justice
system? Also, the traditional system in Uganda is part of the peace process. However, most of due
process procedures don’t apply in mato oput processes.

Harmonization is possible because even if the trials are different in nature, they all share the
reparation processes in their cultures.

Mr. Joseph Mudakikwa (AJPRODHO)

In Gacaca courts, we see a lot of equal participation, at the judge level included. Women helped
bringing the truth and open the dialogue on genocide.

However, most of the judges are men. The only criteria, in addition of being honest and not have
been part of the genocide, is to know how to read and how to write. The national service has
provided formation to judges to help them in their work, especially on proceedings.

You can’t go to classic courts if you are not satisfied: it’s a complete process in itself. However,
referral and information sharing exist between the traditional and the classic systems.

Mr. Howard Varney (South African advocate, formerly chief investigator of the Sierra
Leonean Truth and Reconciliation Commission)

The TRC and the Court didn’t start at the same point and worked apart from each other in South
Africa, which was not the case in Sierra Leone. In the latter, the Statute doesn’t mention any
relations between the two institutions.

The judges should have 10 years in office in order to preserve their independence and should never
be removed from the executive.

“No peace without justice”, “justice is necessary for reconciliation”: these slogans are problematic
because they put reconciliation in the hands of lawyers and the formal justice process, when
reconciliation should be handled by the people whom are the key of every process. The collective
effect is to produce reconciliation, something that accumulation of individual cases in court is unable
to achieve.

In Mozambique, after a violent civil war, they never made a decision to not have such reconciliation
processes; they just decided to go on with the reconstruction of the country.

11.30 – 1.30 Group Discussions



                                                          28
                       Impact of International Criminal Justice in the East African Region

                                                    22 – 24 March 2007
                                         Great Rift Valley Lodge, Naivasha, Kenya

                              Initiative Supported by Open Society Initiative for East Africa and
                                    The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation

The participants will divide into working groups to discuss a) whether there are key conclusions and recommendations
that can be made on the impact of international justice mechanisms in the East African region. What do we want
from international tribunals? How can they best have an impact on national processes? b) What can we, as lawyers,
do to develop strategies to deal with impunity? What are the practical ways in which the initiative can move forward
from here? What would an action plan for a network of lawyers working on international justice in East Africa look
like?

2.30 – 4.30 Discussions in Plenary

At this session, the group leaders from the morning session will present their findings and recommendations. A work
plan and next steps will then be finalized.

Working Group 1 Deliberations:

Challenges

    1) Courts/Tribunals operating in cities in which war is still ongoing creates security problems
       for investigators and outreach
    2) Reaching victims in IDP camps being administrated by governments is a problem, as there is
       need for permission to get to these victims
    3) Lack of awareness at the grassroots level
    4) Misinterpretation of the ICC by governments, politicians, CSOs

A) Outreach Strategies

    1) need to balance security and transparency in outreach, as well as when doing investigations
    2) ICC/Tribunals takes a leadership role in outreach activities being done by different actors,
       e.g. CSOs, for better coordination so as to dispel misconceptions and perceptions
    3) Outreach to be directed at identified key stakeholders, e.g. communities at grassroots level,
       politicians, local leaders, etc.
    4) Need for consultation with most affected persons, particularly victims in designing outreach
       strategies
    5) ICTR: Planning outreach as part of the completion strategy Thus, outreach should include
       an overview of operations of the Court from the onset; to enable people to have a
       comprehensive understanding of the ICTR
    6) Periodic monitoring and evaluation of outreach strategies: Build in mechanisms for those
       most affected, e.g. victims, to assess the outreach strategies
    7) The Sierra Leonean Report on best practices to be a point of reference in adopting outreach
       strategies

B) Strategies for devolution of international tribunals’ legacy to local communities

    1) All public records be kept in the relevant country/region so as to make them accessible to
       the public


                                                             29
                   Impact of International Criminal Justice in the East African Region

                                                22 – 24 March 2007
                                     Great Rift Valley Lodge, Naivasha, Kenya

                          Initiative Supported by Open Society Initiative for East Africa and
                                The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation

   2) Outreach strategies to ensure understanding of the operations of the Tribunals/Courts. Also
      need for institutionalizing them in the national curriculum
   3) Capacity building:
          a. Includes training for key stakeholders, e.g. legal professionals
          b. This will also build in transfer of physical assets used by Courts, e.g. computers, to
              the documentation centers set up
   4) Any physical asset identified, such as buildings, be used as a monument of the Court to serve
      as a documentation/education center

Working Group 2 Deliberations:

A. Identify existing opportunities

   1) The existing networks include the EALS, national law societies
   2) There are other networks we can look into for example there is the African Network for
      Transitional Justice – they have a website and journal, they exchange via email documents,
      court application
   3) In addition we need to investigate the African Journal of International & Comparative Law –
      perhaps there is an association already that produces this journal

B. Outline possible strategies

   1) Creation of a network around the EALS was considered vital – A section on the EALS
      website for Naivasha participants to follow progress
   2) A coalition loosely based around the EALS of lawyers, CSOs interested in international
      justice
   3) It was decided that the best way forward for the workshop is to create focal points from
      participants from each country that would undertake various tasks at the national level.
   4) Focal points can thus:
           a. Help establish the loose coalition
           b. Mobilise various actors towards national coalition to feed into the overall network -
              identify lawyers to from CSOs, academica, government (also non lawyers)
           c. Network with judges – targeted by the focal point with the support of IB/EALS –
              have a meeting of judges in the sub-region
           d. Focal point to network with University Commissions of the different countries to
              lobby for PIL/ICL to be compulsory for law degrees
           e. Exploit existing academic fora and for example the ICRC’s forum for international
              humanitarian law
           f. Outreach to Parliamentarians – focal point (There is an OSJI Parliamentarian
              meeting being organized for end of April –we use that meeting)
           g. Media – in the coalition at the national level
           h. Organize a meeting of regional judges to discuss public international law and
              international criminal law – get a judge from each country to present a paper in order
              to raise interest


                                                         30
                   Impact of International Criminal Justice in the East African Region

                                                22 – 24 March 2007
                                     Great Rift Valley Lodge, Naivasha, Kenya

                          Initiative Supported by Open Society Initiative for East Africa and
                                The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation

   5) Of great importance is the establishment of an association lawyers: the Association of
      African Lawyers for International Law
   6) Such association can have a journal and website, members pay subscriptions , a have a
      resource pool of lawyers to attend to situations at national levels, train practitioners,
      academics, try test cases based on international law, to set up training courses and train
      lawyers and judges
   7) The present secretariat that organised the meeting can be interim secretariat to work on that
      issue – start with a small number once established will get others to join – at the East
      African level we still need more participation – commitment to further IJ -

C. Give 3-4 practical action points (national & regional)

   1) EALS/IB help to coordinate network (establish a section on EALS website for post
      Naivasha developments)
   2) Steering Committee to be established with regard to the Association, to have various issues
      on the agenda:
          a. create the Association
          b. identify opportunities
   3) Focal points from each country to carry tasks mentioned to be appointed from participants,
      focal points will also to feed Steering Committee (Steering Committee coordinates with focal
      point)
   4) EALS special newsletter on Naivasha meeting, each participant drafts a short piece on an
      issue of interest raised during the meeting

Working Group 3 Deliberations:

A. Who are the Stakeholders?
    Military
    Police
    Judicial Officers
    Lawyers- Practitioners, |State Counsels ( dealing with prosecutions, treaties, legislative
     drafting, Civil litigation, Civil Society Lawyers
    Members of Parliament
    Universities and Law Schools
    Law Reform Commissions
    National Commissions of Human Rights
    National Constitutional Review Commission (Sudan)

B. Existing Opportunities
    Universities (Faculties of Law and other Faculties engaged in teaching of International
      Relations including conflict resolution)
    Special institutes and centers of law
    Continuing legal education for lawyers (through Law Societies) and judges


                                                         31
                  Impact of International Criminal Justice in the East African Region

                                               22 – 24 March 2007
                                    Great Rift Valley Lodge, Naivasha, Kenya

                         Initiative Supported by Open Society Initiative for East Africa and
                               The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation

      ICRC supports training in IHL
      National Human Rights Commissions
      East Africa Judges and Magistrates Associations
      Law Reform Commissions

C. Developing Strategies for Training Stakeholders on International Humanitarian Law and
   International Criminal Law Instruments

   1) The Instruments and Issues
         a. Geneva Conventions
         b. Two 1977 Protocols
         c. Third Protocol to the Geneva Conventions
         d. Various Weapons Conventions
         e. Rome Statute
         f. Public International Law
         g. Related Human Rights Law Treaties- Genocide, Torture, etc
         h. Related Public International Law Provisions
   2) Transitional Justice
         a. Task Analysis- Will assess what the competencies and knowledge base of different
              groups to identify where the focus of the training needs to be and make it relevant to
              their job descriptions or institutional mandates.
         b. Identify training needs at policy level and implementation level
         c. Develop training program and curriculum (involve knowledge management,
              monitoring and evaluation to develop best practices).
         d. Ensure strong African participations component through exposure to international
              criminal justice interventions in Africa.
   3) Action Points
         a. Bring together training organizations at national level such as universities, bar
              associations and national human rights commissions to identify specific roles that
              they can play as well as levels of cooperation and involvement
         b. At a regional Level organize Meetings and Forums for regional organizations such as
              EALS and other associations of Judicial Officers, Kituo cha Katiba, EAJMA
         c. Once a shared purpose is arrived at with these national and regional organizations
              will be empowered to initiate training activities including development of curriculum
              and course content that is tailored to their audiences.

D. Developing Strategies for Effective Domestication of IHL and International Criminal Law
   Instruments

   1) Lobbying government to ratify and domesticate these instruments. This will involve:
         a. Sensitizing Stakeholders to develop a shared vision and advocacy plan
         b. Using Media
         c. Networking and developing coalitions with civil society, donors
   2) Dissemination


                                                        32
                    Impact of International Criminal Justice in the East African Region

                                                 22 – 24 March 2007
                                      Great Rift Valley Lodge, Naivasha, Kenya

                           Initiative Supported by Open Society Initiative for East Africa and
                                 The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation

           a. To ensure high public participation in the domestication process e.g. Giving their
               views on the draft legislations
           b. Establish technical teams of experts to work with drafting department to ensure that
               the bills effectively incorporate the international instrument
           c. Develop simplified versions of laws to facilitate understanding and creating
               ownership of the domestication process;
           d. Specifically target MPs because of their role in the legislative process
    3) Exploit the good will that currently exists for the application of human rights standards at
       the international level through engagement with multilateral and bilateral donors, who may
       have leverage over state governments.
    4) Action points
           a. Harmonization of domestic legislation through reviews and amendments
           b. Identify Key focal Points – Bar Associations, Law Reform Commissions, National
               IHL Implementation Committees, National Commissions of Human Rights as well
               as Law Schools to coordinate domestication agenda

E. Developing Strategies for Incorporating IHL and Criminal Law into Core Curricula of Law
   Schools in East Africa

    1) Petition the National councils for legal education to ensure IHL and international criminal
       law are incorporated in law degree courses
    2) East African Law Society can take the lead in coordinating the national councils for legal
       education to harmonize teaching, examination of these subjects in the region
    3) Bar associations can also be focal points for ensuring the courses are part of CLE
    4) Encourage the round-table for academics teaching these courses for purposes of sharing on
       teaching and research methodologies
    5) Partner with the ICRC who is interested in supporting the dissemination of IHL in local
       universities.

Following the presentations made by the working groups, these comments were made:

   We should start a thesis campaign for undergraduate and graduate, for researches on
    international law
   Harmonization is the key starting point in order for East African to be more competitive
   Law societies should participate in coordinating CLE, but also in the harmonization process of
    the universities’ curriculum
   Universities’ officials and lawyers should start talking to each other and should give feed-back to
    the other group
   Law societies should get together to create a legal education program
   There’s a West African Bar Association which holds meeting with lawyers, parliamentarians and
    judges to educate them on issues and to try to harmonize practices and legislations. Why not do
    the same in East Africa.
   The deans of the East Africa University Council should meet periodically



                                                          33
                   Impact of International Criminal Justice in the East African Region

                                                22 – 24 March 2007
                                     Great Rift Valley Lodge, Naivasha, Kenya

                          Initiative Supported by Open Society Initiative for East Africa and
                                The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation

   International moot Courts should be created and encouraged
   Target the best people in universities to answer questions on programs, contests,
    opportunities… for dissemination purposes

At the end of the deliberations, the following recommendations were made:

   Try to define a key focal point for each country
            o Izzildin and Dongluak for Sudan
            o Kamanga for Tanzania
            o Binta and Kamara for Sierra Leone
            o Mudakikwa for Rwanda
            o Jaoko and Muli for Kenya
   Association of Lawyers in International Law
            o Look at the African Journal on comparative law
            o Is that Association already in existence? We create a new one or we join them?
            o Look at the coalition for the ICC, maybe as a model
            o EALS and IBA should work on maintaining this loose network, as a steering
                committee
            o We need committed lawyers to pursue that objective
   Establishment of the Steering committee:
            o EALS with Don as a focal point
            o With cooption of Kamara and Birabwa




                                                         34

				
DOCUMENT INFO